(05-08-2014 06:27 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 05:35 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 05:30 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  As far as Tech...

no way in hell

The SBC offered 4 C-USA schools just a year or two ago and no one took the bait

Who did they offer?

I will try to find the article but I believe it was Marshall, Charlotte (or maybe ECU), USM, UAB

They offered both Charlotte and ECU, but I don't think it was at the same time.

The SBC offered membership to Charlotte and UTSA as moveups and they tried to lure Marshall, UAB, USM, and ECU away to kill CUSA. I'm pretty sure the current CUSA members were offered membership before Charlotte and UTSA were offered though.

Not a bad plan for the SBC. Never hurts to ask.

If that had happened, Charlotte and App would both likely be in CUSA together right now.

I know politically no way it could happen, but if you could merge Tech, ULM, and Grambling all into one school. Wow that could be a very nice all around completive school across the board. Or if Tech was in Shreveport things would be a little easier on everybody as well.

(05-09-2014 03:00 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  I know politically no way it could happen, but if you could merge Tech, ULM, and Grambling all into one school. Wow that could be a very nice all around completive school across the board. Or if Tech was in Shreveport things would be a little easier on everybody as well.

It certainly would solve SOME of our higher ed problems.

New problem - Would the new mascot be Wardogs or Bullhawks?

(05-09-2014 09:50 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 05:52 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 05:10 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  My theory remains this:
1. No C-USA would consider Sun Belt until after 2015-16 because no one is walking away from the current TV deal.
2. If the next C-USA TV deal is not as attractive and the Sun Belt is able to use the renegotiation window to get similar money the dynamic becomes a bit different.
3. The highest threat to shift would be UAB and then only if it is the only way to clear the political opposition to an on-campus stadium.
4. The next highest threat would be the Texas schools if as a group it can be demonstrated that the revenue in Sun Belt with them in would be better (unlikely) than C-USA or essentially equal and unlike C-USA the political clout of the Texans would be such that they could dominate the awarding of conference events and such.

Uab is tied to the ua bot. An on campus stadium was as much as done when the ua bot said no. Moving to the sbc will not help with this matter. Leaving the ua bot will.

UA BOT like its contemporaries elsewhere is a political animal.

Right now there aren't any people out there with sufficient political clout to support UAB getting an on-campus stadium apparently. The city at this point isn't even likely to be in their corner especially since UAB already abandoned the civic center.

But politics I've learned is an arena where almost anything is possible if you are willing to pay the price.


UAB could find political allies in other state schools who go to the governor asking that the way be cleared for UAB if...

The city goes to the governor saying we can move on redevelop the Legion Field property if UAB is in a conference with several schools that are close and will be bringing visitors to the city.

Now does UAB want to pay that price? Not right now for sure. If the CUSA TV money picture changes and football isn't on an upswing mired in Legion Field, the perceived cost could change.

Bham is close to broke tried to file bankuptcy already. They will not take up the cause of blazer football. Out of state governors will not save uab football. Think of how ridiculous it would be for your neighbor to come to your house and tell your wife how she should treat you. The only way uab can save themselves from ua is to pry themselves away from the ua bot. Out of state gov. How ridiculous youve got to be kidding.

(05-09-2014 01:45 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Its not the greatest long term strategy...but its very similar to what ASU did when we were first trying to grow. Football drives the bus. If you grow your football program, you increase your donor and fan base.

An administration that can grow their football program, and then use that success to help the growth of their Olympic Sports programs are the ones that can really move.

I have the disagree completely here.

AState moved to independence in football to benefit basketball.

Make one NCAA Tournament and we had the highest paid hoops coach in the history of the league.

We went all-in, but it was on hoops.

But for fan pressure finally causing Steve to be forced to can his OC (name withheld) and hire Clay Helton who then got hired away and second choice Hugh Freeze gets hired, followed by fan and media pressure to hire Freeze rather that whomever it was Dean wanted to hire, AState football wouldn't be where it is today.

AState didn't go "all-in" in on football until Malzahn and then realized we didn't have the AD to get the job done.

Even in the darkest of days though we never racked up the last place and next to last places finishes that ULM and UALR slogged through across the board under the leadership they've had.

(05-09-2014 03:15 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 09:50 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 05:52 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 05:10 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  My theory remains this:
1. No C-USA would consider Sun Belt until after 2015-16 because no one is walking away from the current TV deal.
2. If the next C-USA TV deal is not as attractive and the Sun Belt is able to use the renegotiation window to get similar money the dynamic becomes a bit different.
3. The highest threat to shift would be UAB and then only if it is the only way to clear the political opposition to an on-campus stadium.
4. The next highest threat would be the Texas schools if as a group it can be demonstrated that the revenue in Sun Belt with them in would be better (unlikely) than C-USA or essentially equal and unlike C-USA the political clout of the Texans would be such that they could dominate the awarding of conference events and such.

Uab is tied to the ua bot. An on campus stadium was as much as done when the ua bot said no. Moving to the sbc will not help with this matter. Leaving the ua bot will.

UA BOT like its contemporaries elsewhere is a political animal.

Right now there aren't any people out there with sufficient political clout to support UAB getting an on-campus stadium apparently. The city at this point isn't even likely to be in their corner especially since UAB already abandoned the civic center.

But politics I've learned is an arena where almost anything is possible if you are willing to pay the price.


UAB could find political allies in other state schools who go to the governor asking that the way be cleared for UAB if...

The city goes to the governor saying we can move on redevelop the Legion Field property if UAB is in a conference with several schools that are close and will be bringing visitors to the city.

Now does UAB want to pay that price? Not right now for sure. If the CUSA TV money picture changes and football isn't on an upswing mired in Legion Field, the perceived cost could change.

Bham is close to broke tried to file bankuptcy already. They will not take up the cause of blazer football. Out of state governors will not save uab football. Think of how ridiculous it would be for your neighbor to come to your house and tell your wife how she should treat you. The only way uab can save themselves from ua is to pry themselves away from the ua bot. Out of state gov. How ridiculous youve got to be kidding.

WTF?????

Not suggesting anything as completely stupid as what is highlighted.

The Sun Belt has two Alabama schools that have supporters who have some level of political clout. If UAB were to gain their assistance, maybe even gain the assistance of JSU who might be able to package themselves with UAB, they might have the political clout to help free UAB from the UA BOT or at least get an on-campus stadium.

They arent held prisoner. In alabama ua gets the lion share of the money. To seperate from the ua bot is to be independent of the lions share. They would be forced to get in line with the rest of us.
I would argue thats what the should do. U of Birmingham or Birmingham U. But alas they do not ask me. So until they seperate they are stuck living under house rules.
They see themselves as a basketball school so I dont think they really care. They also dont seem to care if they are dead last in football as long as basketball is well enough. God forbid if UA ever gets any good at basketball they will then do their best to hinder uab basketball then.
Cusa should cut them loose. In favor of a team in the bham market who is not dependent upon ua's good wishes.

I've never understood comments by Tech fans lording their superiority over ULM. After having been to Ruston, Monroe and Lafayette it is even harder to understand. From what I can tell Tech gets its TV coverage and airport service from Monroe. Seems like a tad bit of envy to me.

(05-09-2014 04:08 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  They arent held prisoner. In alabama ua gets the lion share of the money. To seperate from the ua bot is to be independent of the lions share. They would be forced to get in line with the rest of us.
I would argue thats what the should do. U of Birmingham or Birmingham U. But alas they do not ask me. So until they seperate they are stuck living under house rules.
They see themselves as a basketball school so I dont think they really care. They also dont seem to care if they are dead last in football as long as basketball is well enough. God forbid if UA ever gets any good at basketball they will then do their best to hinder uab basketball then.

In most states (your laws may vary), a state institution exists because it has either been created by an arm of the state or been created some other way and absorbed into an existing institution and moving from one board control to independence or to another board would require action of either the legislature or some controlling state body.

They have never attempted anything even when at the last minute ua said NO to the on campus stadium they had lined up. They had even secured the bonds necessary. The state would not hinder their independence. They are obviously satisfied with what they have. Good basketball, crap football. I believe they could be real competitors to ua and au if they would seperate. But they do not wish to.

(05-09-2014 03:05 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:00 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  I know politically no way it could happen, but if you could merge Tech, ULM, and Grambling all into one school. Wow that could be a very nice all around completive school across the board. Or if Tech was in Shreveport things would be a little easier on everybody as well.

It certainly would solve SOME of our higher ed problems.

New problem - Would the new mascot be Wardogs or Bullhawks?

Oh well for the complimentary post I was about to make about the Cajuns. We do a lot with a little and have an admin in place that is not putting up with losing and is raising money. Tech's facilities are no better than ours and they are in the same region with less of the amenities at ULM's disposal. Hard to argue that Tech football or baseball is any better than ours. Basketball, yes, but we basically had the death penalty. For that matter they are better an ANYONE in the Belt. What I WAS going to say about the Cajuns, is that you are in a high population, growing area of the state, and are doing VERY well with your sports programs right now. Where Tech, I just don't like, I actually pull for the Cajuns to do well out of conference usually. You guys are starting to wear on that concept though. However, even as well as you are doing, I wouldn't bash us too much. With our tiny budget and low income area, we still beat you in football and split with you in basketball.

(05-09-2014 04:29 PM)Arrowhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:05 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:00 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  I know politically no way it could happen, but if you could merge Tech, ULM, and Grambling all into one school. Wow that could be a very nice all around completive school across the board. Or if Tech was in Shreveport things would be a little easier on everybody as well.

It certainly would solve SOME of our higher ed problems.

New problem - Would the new mascot be Wardogs or Bullhawks?

Oh well for the complimentary post I was about to make about the Cajuns. We do a lot with a little and have an admin in place that is not putting up with losing and is raising money. Tech's facilities are no better than ours and they are in the same region with less of the amenities at ULM's disposal. Hard to argue that Tech football or baseball is any better than ours. Basketball, yes, but we basically had the death penalty. For that matter they are better an ANYONE in the Belt. What I WAS going to say about the Cajuns, is that you are in a high population, growing area of the state, and are doing VERY well with your sports programs right now. Where Tech, I just don't like, I actually pull for the Cajuns to do well out of conference usually. You guys are starting to wear on that concept though. However, even as well as you are doing, I wouldn't bash us too much. With our tiny budget and low income area, we still beat you in football and split with you in basketball.

Facilities aren't better? Their end zone project is gonna blow your stadium away. And no offense, but your basketball arena sucks. Granted, you don't have alumni like Karl Malone and Paul Milsap pouring money in it.

(05-09-2014 04:22 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  They have never attempted anything even when at the last minute ua said NO to the on campus stadium they had lined up. They had even secured the bonds necessary. The state would not hinder their independence. They are obviously satisfied with what they have. Good basketball, crap football. I believe they could be real competitors to ua and au if they would seperate. But they do not wish to.

I think southern miss. would be a good get. I think they could develop some better rivalries with us than the new make-up of c-usa..maybe even get marshall for the east. I like tech and they have some alumni here in the dfw area, but they are probably glad they are in c-usa. I dont see anything happening till utep and rice leave tho.

(05-09-2014 04:29 PM)Arrowhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:05 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:00 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  I know politically no way it could happen, but if you could merge Tech, ULM, and Grambling all into one school. Wow that could be a very nice all around completive school across the board. Or if Tech was in Shreveport things would be a little easier on everybody as well.

It certainly would solve SOME of our higher ed problems.

New problem - Would the new mascot be Wardogs or Bullhawks?

Oh well for the complimentary post I was about to make about the Cajuns. We do a lot with a little and have an admin in place that is not putting up with losing and is raising money. Tech's facilities are no better than ours and they are in the same region with less of the amenities at ULM's disposal. Hard to argue that Tech football or baseball is any better than ours. Basketball, yes, but we basically had the death penalty. For that matter they are better an ANYONE in the Belt. What I WAS going to say about the Cajuns, is that you are in a high population, growing area of the state, and are doing VERY well with your sports programs right now. Where Tech, I just don't like, I actually pull for the Cajuns to do well out of conference usually. You guys are starting to wear on that concept though. However, even as well as you are doing, I wouldn't bash us too much. With our tiny budget and low income area, we still beat you in football and split with you in basketball.

Geez, someone is taking a joking comment way, WAY too seriously.

(05-09-2014 01:41 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 01:26 PM)Redwolves06 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:03 PM)Bigtom12 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 10:54 AM)Arrowhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 10:47 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  That is pretty much all accurate.

But the business of "separation" can morph into religious dogma and away from pragmatic business decision over time...and that can end up limiting your options instead of increasing them.

This is a great post and so true. Both Tech and ULM have similar facilities and both could use the crowds and virtually zero travel cost. I've honestly always thought Tech has little man syndrome and knows that ULM has the advantages of a larger population, airport, hotels, restaurants, etc. and is afraid if we ever get good leadership and start winning we will pass them by. Truth is our football and baseball are better than they are right now. I've always said if you are so great then prove it on the field. At this point though I don't really care if we play or not except I do think it is depriving north Louisiana a great rivalry and a game that took precedence over any game in the state the day it was played. Also, I wouldn't mind an easy win over a C-USA team.

I agree ULM has more potential than Tech. ULM has one of the only pharmacy schools in Louisiana. It is surrounded by a larger population, this area is also surrounded by the best High school football teams in the nation like. West Monroe, Ouachita, West Ouachita, Sterlington, Neville high schools. I think ULM campus also looks better than LaTech.

Can't speak for all Cajun fans but the only reason I oppose ULM is because of the name issue.

More potential? You do realize that tech crushes ulm historically in academics and athletics right? I'm very in tune to what ulm has going on, and they're barely surviving.

Big tom is just being polite. You've got ulm pegged correctly. They'd never believe that criticism if it came from instate. And they can't see that robbing your other programs to prop up football is just not a sound long term strategy.

I responded to the wrong post. This is what I was responding to.

(05-09-2014 05:34 PM)Arrowhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 01:41 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 01:26 PM)Redwolves06 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:03 PM)Bigtom12 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 10:54 AM)Arrowhead Wrote:  This is a great post and so true. Both Tech and ULM have similar facilities and both could use the crowds and virtually zero travel cost. I've honestly always thought Tech has little man syndrome and knows that ULM has the advantages of a larger population, airport, hotels, restaurants, etc. and is afraid if we ever get good leadership and start winning we will pass them by. Truth is our football and baseball are better than they are right now. I've always said if you are so great then prove it on the field. At this point though I don't really care if we play or not except I do think it is depriving north Louisiana a great rivalry and a game that took precedence over any game in the state the day it was played. Also, I wouldn't mind an easy win over a C-USA team.

I agree ULM has more potential than Tech. ULM has one of the only pharmacy schools in Louisiana. It is surrounded by a larger population, this area is also surrounded by the best High school football teams in the nation like. West Monroe, Ouachita, West Ouachita, Sterlington, Neville high schools. I think ULM campus also looks better than LaTech.

Can't speak for all Cajun fans but the only reason I oppose ULM is because of the name issue.

More potential? You do realize that tech crushes ulm historically in academics and athletics right? I'm very in tune to what ulm has going on, and they're barely surviving.

Big tom is just being polite. You've got ulm pegged correctly. They'd never believe that criticism if it came from instate. And they can't see that robbing your other programs to prop up football is just not a sound long term strategy.

I responded to the wrong post. This is what I was responding to.

So which will it be, Wardogs or BullHawks?

Its all in good fun Arrowhead.

(05-09-2014 04:33 PM)Redwolves06 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 04:29 PM)Arrowhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:05 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:00 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  I know politically no way it could happen, but if you could merge Tech, ULM, and Grambling all into one school. Wow that could be a very nice all around completive school across the board. Or if Tech was in Shreveport things would be a little easier on everybody as well.

It certainly would solve SOME of our higher ed problems.

New problem - Would the new mascot be Wardogs or Bullhawks?

Oh well for the complimentary post I was about to make about the Cajuns. We do a lot with a little and have an admin in place that is not putting up with losing and is raising money. Tech's facilities are no better than ours and they are in the same region with less of the amenities at ULM's disposal. Hard to argue that Tech football or baseball is any better than ours. Basketball, yes, but we basically had the death penalty. For that matter they are better an ANYONE in the Belt. What I WAS going to say about the Cajuns, is that you are in a high population, growing area of the state, and are doing VERY well with your sports programs right now. Where Tech, I just don't like, I actually pull for the Cajuns to do well out of conference usually. You guys are starting to wear on that concept though. However, even as well as you are doing, I wouldn't bash us too much. With our tiny budget and low income area, we still beat you in football and split with you in basketball.

Facilities aren't better? Their end zone project is gonna blow your stadium away. And no offense, but your basketball arena sucks. Granted, you don't have alumni like Karl Malone and Paul Milsap pouring money in it.

Why would you make such unfounded statements? To my knowledge, Tech has no indoor or outdoor box seating, no skybox and an inadequate press box. It will take more than an end zone complex to "blow our stadium away", since we have a large and luxurious skybox, outdoor and enclosed box seating, a larger video board and are in the process of replacing our old field turf with a state of the art new turf. Plans are also being developed for a new end zone facility. Also, if you dislike our basketball arena, you would not like the one at Ole Miss after which ours is modeled.

I am not suggesting that our facilities cannot stand expansion and improvement, but why a fellow conference member would want to make an unfair and inaccurate comparison of our facilities relative to Tech's beats the heck out of me.

--featherhead

(05-10-2014 01:03 AM)featherhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 04:33 PM)Redwolves06 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 04:29 PM)Arrowhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:05 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:00 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  I know politically no way it could happen, but if you could merge Tech, ULM, and Grambling all into one school. Wow that could be a very nice all around completive school across the board. Or if Tech was in Shreveport things would be a little easier on everybody as well.

It certainly would solve SOME of our higher ed problems.

New problem - Would the new mascot be Wardogs or Bullhawks?

Oh well for the complimentary post I was about to make about the Cajuns. We do a lot with a little and have an admin in place that is not putting up with losing and is raising money. Tech's facilities are no better than ours and they are in the same region with less of the amenities at ULM's disposal. Hard to argue that Tech football or baseball is any better than ours. Basketball, yes, but we basically had the death penalty. For that matter they are better an ANYONE in the Belt. What I WAS going to say about the Cajuns, is that you are in a high population, growing area of the state, and are doing VERY well with your sports programs right now. Where Tech, I just don't like, I actually pull for the Cajuns to do well out of conference usually. You guys are starting to wear on that concept though. However, even as well as you are doing, I wouldn't bash us too much. With our tiny budget and low income area, we still beat you in football and split with you in basketball.

Facilities aren't better? Their end zone project is gonna blow your stadium away. And no offense, but your basketball arena sucks. Granted, you don't have alumni like Karl Malone and Paul Milsap pouring money in it.

Why would you make such unfounded statements? To my knowledge, Tech has no indoor or outdoor box seating, no skybox and an inadequate press box. It will take more than an end zone complex to "blow our stadium away", since we have a large and luxurious skybox, outdoor and enclosed box seating, a larger video board and are in the process of replacing our old field turf with a state of the art new turf. Plans are also being developed for a new end zone facility. Also, if you dislike our basketball arena, you would not like the one at Ole Miss after which ours is modeled.

I am not suggesting that our facilities cannot stand expansion and improvement, but why a fellow conference member would want to make an unfair and inaccurate comparison of our facilities relative to Tech's beats the heck out of me.

--featherhead

The Tad Pad is generally regarded to be the worst in the SEC. You were on a good roll until you played that card.

(05-10-2014 08:55 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-10-2014 01:03 AM)featherhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 04:33 PM)Redwolves06 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 04:29 PM)Arrowhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:05 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  It certainly would solve SOME of our higher ed problems.

New problem - Would the new mascot be Wardogs or Bullhawks?

Oh well for the complimentary post I was about to make about the Cajuns. We do a lot with a little and have an admin in place that is not putting up with losing and is raising money. Tech's facilities are no better than ours and they are in the same region with less of the amenities at ULM's disposal. Hard to argue that Tech football or baseball is any better than ours. Basketball, yes, but we basically had the death penalty. For that matter they are better an ANYONE in the Belt. What I WAS going to say about the Cajuns, is that you are in a high population, growing area of the state, and are doing VERY well with your sports programs right now. Where Tech, I just don't like, I actually pull for the Cajuns to do well out of conference usually. You guys are starting to wear on that concept though. However, even as well as you are doing, I wouldn't bash us too much. With our tiny budget and low income area, we still beat you in football and split with you in basketball.

Facilities aren't better? Their end zone project is gonna blow your stadium away. And no offense, but your basketball arena sucks. Granted, you don't have alumni like Karl Malone and Paul Milsap pouring money in it.

Why would you make such unfounded statements? To my knowledge, Tech has no indoor or outdoor box seating, no skybox and an inadequate press box. It will take more than an end zone complex to "blow our stadium away", since we have a large and luxurious skybox, outdoor and enclosed box seating, a larger video board and are in the process of replacing our old field turf with a state of the art new turf. Plans are also being developed for a new end zone facility. Also, if you dislike our basketball arena, you would not like the one at Ole Miss after which ours is modeled.

I am not suggesting that our facilities cannot stand expansion and improvement, but why a fellow conference member would want to make an unfair and inaccurate comparison of our facilities relative to Tech's beats the heck out of me.

--featherhead

The Tad Pad is generally regarded to be the worst in the SEC. You were on a good roll until you played that card.

As most of you read we are in discussions with the city for a new arena deal similar to the one ULL has with Lafayette. Featherhead's point is why do conference mates take jabs at a fellow conference school with an asinine, untrue comment to back up a C-USA school, much less tech? Some of you guys blow my mind.

(05-10-2014 08:55 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-10-2014 01:03 AM)featherhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 04:33 PM)Redwolves06 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 04:29 PM)Arrowhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:05 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  It certainly would solve SOME of our higher ed problems.

New problem - Would the new mascot be Wardogs or Bullhawks?

Oh well for the complimentary post I was about to make about the Cajuns. We do a lot with a little and have an admin in place that is not putting up with losing and is raising money. Tech's facilities are no better than ours and they are in the same region with less of the amenities at ULM's disposal. Hard to argue that Tech football or baseball is any better than ours. Basketball, yes, but we basically had the death penalty. For that matter they are better an ANYONE in the Belt. What I WAS going to say about the Cajuns, is that you are in a high population, growing area of the state, and are doing VERY well with your sports programs right now. Where Tech, I just don't like, I actually pull for the Cajuns to do well out of conference usually. You guys are starting to wear on that concept though. However, even as well as you are doing, I wouldn't bash us too much. With our tiny budget and low income area, we still beat you in football and split with you in basketball.

Facilities aren't better? Their end zone project is gonna blow your stadium away. And no offense, but your basketball arena sucks. Granted, you don't have alumni like Karl Malone and Paul Milsap pouring money in it.

Why would you make such unfounded statements? To my knowledge, Tech has no indoor or outdoor box seating, no skybox and an inadequate press box. It will take more than an end zone complex to "blow our stadium away", since we have a large and luxurious skybox, outdoor and enclosed box seating, a larger video board and are in the process of replacing our old field turf with a state of the art new turf. Plans are also being developed for a new end zone facility. Also, if you dislike our basketball arena, you would not like the one at Ole Miss after which ours is modeled.

I am not suggesting that our facilities cannot stand expansion and improvement, but why a fellow conference member would want to make an unfair and inaccurate comparison of our facilities relative to Tech's beats the heck out of me.

--featherhead

The Tad Pad is generally regarded to be the worst in the SEC. You were on a good roll until you played that card.

Mark, so your rebuttal is that we have a basketball arena equivalent to the worst in the SEC? I would think any of us would be happy to have facilities that are equivalent to the worst in the SEC. I'm sure any SBC school would take the worst football stadium in the SEC for sure. I doubt Tech would though since you guys think there's is Jerry's World with that new end zone facility.